Yes, but this issue is not one we should want Google solving. We need better media literacy education throughout life.

When I was trying out passkeys, things allowed either passkey or password still. But yes, I think this need partially reduces the security benefit of passkeys.

Just answered in a different comment.

Just answered in a reply to a different comment.

It’s a combination of issues. First is compatibility issues. Like logging in on mobile web or app with a passkey doesn’t reliably work for me. It might have been due to the password manager, but for some things the option wasn’t even there afaict. If I’m going to really switch to passkeys, I want it to work more reliably.

The second is usability. Passwords in a password manager are a 2 click entry on the username or password form field. Password managers have streamlined this system over the past decade.

Passkeys, ironically, required more steps when pulling from the password manager, including required clicks in less convenient places. I hope these types of issues get ironed out eventually.

I use a password manager with passkey support and still disabled all my passkeys. The user experience for passkeys is so much worse even when support exists.

Pea mushers

The effect (purpose?) of moral panics is to maintain the status quo, scapegoating age old problems as new because there’s a new aspect.

Anyone focusing on social media or phones as the main problem kids and teens are facing today is part of the problem, whether or not it’s intentional.

Totally. But try getting management to understand.

“As long as there’s a record deal we’ll always be friends”

This piece was written by a highly-regarded scifi author a year and a half ago. I say that not to complain about the age but rather to marvel at the authors ability to describe so well something that is only becoming clear to many a year and half later.

Someone probably knows the answer. Ask around. This should include either customers or customer advocates. If nobody knows the answer, then do the simplest thing that accomplishes what you need in order to proceed. Sometimes that means doing nothing. If there are multiple ways to accomplish what you need, do the one that leaves you in a more flexible state for future changes. You can bring up your choices or decisions to team members if you need, possibly during a standup or just ad-hoc.

If you aren’t empowered to take one of those steps, then you are in a dysfunctional environment, in that case, collect your salary and keep your head down, and if you are so inclined, try to find a new company or team to join.

BBQ sauce works with pineapple pizza.

Activity Pub is much more flexible, the tradeoff being that it’s more complex. ActivityPub is basically a flexible CRUD API specifically designed for social networking, with support for federation.

You could fulfill the purpose of RSS with ActivityPub. But, it doesn’t supercede RSS/atom, because the simplicity is valuable for the cases those protocols handle.

This is another sign of what’s already going on. It’s getting into backlash territory.

r/confidentlyincorrect

When done properly it is indeed a great practice.

But so many don’t. The way the modern tech industry functions makes it hard to consistently get right, sadly. I’ve left two companies in the past two years where computational resources for automated testing and validation were simply not available. One didn’t have any manual QA beyond the implementing developer. I’m in a better situation now, but those companies still exist. They’re not exactly tiny startups either.

For all its strengths, without any amount of validation, RWD is very likely to lead to such issues. Unfortunately many industry execs are unsympathetic, seeing RWD as little more than a way to get two things for the price of one.

Responsive design was a neat idea, but has failed in the context of the modern web and tech industry.

Reading that, any winner of the affected awards, however deserving, should decline their award. This year’s Hugos are clearly illegitimate.

This is a misunderstanding of the UN’s primary purpose. The UN is a diplomatic organization meant to enable a baseline minimum amount of diplomatic interaction. It’s primary raison d’etre is preventing a world war / nuclear war. If military might was not respected, then nations would leave the negotiating table and large wars would be harder to avoid. The veto was instrumental in establishing the UN in the first place.